Policy changes are not always communicated in writing but in actions. There are occasions when “exceptions” are made for policy guidelines to be “disregarded”. This creates toxicity in workplaces when rules are not consistent in areas of social control. As an example a “alcohol and drug” policy can be used to prevent representatives from having a “beer” at lunchtime but if the work position demands a “higher degree” of sociability then a manager or person in a leadership position can drink. These types of contradictions are not conducive of a fair and equitable workplace.
Not to mention the violation of policy but the representative sounded terrible. As an example a speech was made to a group of golfers at a tournament in my community. The director of slots made a speech and it sounded like they had a mouthful of cotton and his eyes were barely open. Directors are in a position of responsibility and lead the team. He was not leading to well that day. When this behavior is allowed to persist a policy designed to promote social responsibility is ineffective and not necessary.
I remember when I began working for my community and was released from a position of importance because I came to the workplace “drunk” and looking for help at 4 am in the morning. The driver was an employee and ended up getting fired too.
The winds of change did not stop the highest paid positions in the community from violating policy. Why have the rule if the leadership is allowed to violate the rule and the team can not. Inconsistencies are so evident today that entire policies like “alcohol and drug” testing get in the way of being productive. It is merely a political tool to socially control the masses and not needed.
Social change happens when the top of the heap is just as accountable as the person on the bottom.